Decompression CO1881/8NOV
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: EDDM
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Decompression CO1881/8NOV
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/C...036Z/KEWR/KSEA
Just deplaned from CO 1881. The 737-824 (LN 70x?) had a decompression in flight at FL340 around 10.45 EST and ditched to 10 000 ft in aprox 10 mins. Crew very professional. As a SLF I can't comment on the technical details, but the pilot came on after leveling at 10000 ft and said the the automatic and backup system failed and they were manually adjusting cabin pressure. We diverted to KBIS and are now awaiting a CO relief aircraft from KIAH.
Interesting experience. The cypriot 737 decompression incident came to my mind. The FAs acted very quick and the masks deployed without issues.
Just deplaned from CO 1881. The 737-824 (LN 70x?) had a decompression in flight at FL340 around 10.45 EST and ditched to 10 000 ft in aprox 10 mins. Crew very professional. As a SLF I can't comment on the technical details, but the pilot came on after leveling at 10000 ft and said the the automatic and backup system failed and they were manually adjusting cabin pressure. We diverted to KBIS and are now awaiting a CO relief aircraft from KIAH.
Interesting experience. The cypriot 737 decompression incident came to my mind. The FAs acted very quick and the masks deployed without issues.
Last edited by oliver2002; 9th Nov 2006 at 05:20.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: EDDM
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Last edited by oliver2002; 9th Nov 2006 at 06:17.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am rather surprised there have been no further comments on this thread. Are numbers of PPs sticking heads in sand? Or do the majority know how it happens, won't say, and have assessed that it is of no significance?
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I can see that oliver2002 has told flyertalk that he discovered the faulty aircraft was moved ten hours later. And someone else there says it did not exceed FL250 on that 1194 mile flight and it flew slow.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: EDDM
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since no one was posting to my thread I gave up putting up any info here 
I guessed the pprune community was insulted by an SLF daring to post in their hallowed world.
A friend of an acquaintance is working with maintainance at CO in IAH. He will let us know what was wrong with the aircraft.
LH499 MEX-FRA made a rather quick landing in PHL yesterday morning:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/D...412Z/MMMX/KPHL
It continued a few hours later and landed 6h late in FRA.
I guessed the pprune community was insulted by an SLF daring to post in their hallowed world. A friend of an acquaintance is working with maintainance at CO in IAH. He will let us know what was wrong with the aircraft.
LH499 MEX-FRA made a rather quick landing in PHL yesterday morning:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/D...412Z/MMMX/KPHL
It continued a few hours later and landed 6h late in FRA.
Buttonpusher
Since no one was posting to my thread I gave up putting up any info here I guessed the pprune community was insulted by an SLF daring to post in their hallowed world.
A friend of an acquaintance is working with maintainance at CO in IAH. He will let us know what was wrong with the aircraft.
LH499 MEX-FRA made a rather quick landing in PHL yesterday morning:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/D...412Z/MMMX/KPHL
It continued a few hours later and landed 6h late in FRA.
I guessed the pprune community was insulted by an SLF daring to post in their hallowed world. A friend of an acquaintance is working with maintainance at CO in IAH. He will let us know what was wrong with the aircraft.
LH499 MEX-FRA made a rather quick landing in PHL yesterday morning:
http://flightaware.com/live/flight/D...412Z/MMMX/KPHL
It continued a few hours later and landed 6h late in FRA.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: London
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you are being unreasonably critical and condescending, FLCH. No one is asking you to make something up. We are interested in what you know about these systems. And if PPs don't know then oliver2002 is most certainly not overdramatising anything, is he?
Of course oliver2002 is due an accounting of what went wrong. His life was threatened in a real emergency. He paid the airline to get him from A to B reasonably comfortably and safely and they failed. His life was endangered. No question about that whatsoever. He was taken up to 34000 feet where humans without special machines simply die by an airline who then managed to lose his life support system. They then raised his blood pressure along with that of a cabin load of fellow passengers by dropping in his face an alternative cheap and temporary system which actually could support him for a maximum of only 12 or 14 minutes. The resolution of the emergency also required the warning systems to operate correctly, the crew to have identified the fault within seconds, to have donned their own oxygen masks and hope they worked lest they potentially become totally unable to perform within one minute, and for them to immediately descend the aircraft at a high rate which may or may not have injured some passengers in order to stop oliver2002 and his fellow passengers dying from eventual asphyxiation or something else.
And you say that because this is a pilot's BB there is nothing more to say than that a checklist was followed and it all seemed to turn out right in the end?
Who is responsible for deciding several times a day whether to launch these machines up to the Tropopause? Is it the autopilot perhaps? Who is responsible for maintaining the life support systems throughout the flight? Oh that would be the autopressurisation system, eh? ... oh not forgetting the maintenance engineers on the ground with their own bulletin board? Right. On a Space Shuttle maybe. On 737s there have been too many pressurisation incidents for most people's liking. 737-800s are the workhorse of a number of modern fleets which means many of us rely on them. On a 738 it's you who is responsible for the whole shooting match after the doors close! ... that's why we want to hear from you now.
Something along the lines of "Oi you! You fly a 737-800? Tell us what pressurisation systems and procedural problems / oversights you know about that might cause failures, ... please. We've seen too many on 737 and we don't like the fact that a whole generation of newer aircraft on fast turnaround / minimum maintenance ops seem similarly affected."
I was trained as a scientist, a physicist. That meant I looked at the world around me and wondered why things might behave the way they do. It didn't mean that I dismissed observations I couldn't explain and waited patiently to be fed "facts" by people who might know more than me. That's for GSCE students. I learned to know for myself what is fact, what is well-formed hypothesis, what is wishful thinking, and what is plain arrogance and denial.
Also, later on I also got to appreciate how all these things are routinely interchanged to avoid liability for negligence when accidents occur.
I am not interested in pointing any finger. I am just impatient to drive out complacency from aviation so when I and my family fly I only have to worry about whether I can afford the money not my life.
If you personally have your reasons for not wanting to pass on what you know, that's your prerogative.
Of course oliver2002 is due an accounting of what went wrong. His life was threatened in a real emergency. He paid the airline to get him from A to B reasonably comfortably and safely and they failed. His life was endangered. No question about that whatsoever. He was taken up to 34000 feet where humans without special machines simply die by an airline who then managed to lose his life support system. They then raised his blood pressure along with that of a cabin load of fellow passengers by dropping in his face an alternative cheap and temporary system which actually could support him for a maximum of only 12 or 14 minutes. The resolution of the emergency also required the warning systems to operate correctly, the crew to have identified the fault within seconds, to have donned their own oxygen masks and hope they worked lest they potentially become totally unable to perform within one minute, and for them to immediately descend the aircraft at a high rate which may or may not have injured some passengers in order to stop oliver2002 and his fellow passengers dying from eventual asphyxiation or something else.
And you say that because this is a pilot's BB there is nothing more to say than that a checklist was followed and it all seemed to turn out right in the end?
Who is responsible for deciding several times a day whether to launch these machines up to the Tropopause? Is it the autopilot perhaps? Who is responsible for maintaining the life support systems throughout the flight? Oh that would be the autopressurisation system, eh? ... oh not forgetting the maintenance engineers on the ground with their own bulletin board? Right. On a Space Shuttle maybe. On 737s there have been too many pressurisation incidents for most people's liking. 737-800s are the workhorse of a number of modern fleets which means many of us rely on them. On a 738 it's you who is responsible for the whole shooting match after the doors close! ... that's why we want to hear from you now.
Something along the lines of "Oi you! You fly a 737-800? Tell us what pressurisation systems and procedural problems / oversights you know about that might cause failures, ... please. We've seen too many on 737 and we don't like the fact that a whole generation of newer aircraft on fast turnaround / minimum maintenance ops seem similarly affected."
I was trained as a scientist, a physicist. That meant I looked at the world around me and wondered why things might behave the way they do. It didn't mean that I dismissed observations I couldn't explain and waited patiently to be fed "facts" by people who might know more than me. That's for GSCE students. I learned to know for myself what is fact, what is well-formed hypothesis, what is wishful thinking, and what is plain arrogance and denial.
Also, later on I also got to appreciate how all these things are routinely interchanged to avoid liability for negligence when accidents occur.
I am not interested in pointing any finger. I am just impatient to drive out complacency from aviation so when I and my family fly I only have to worry about whether I can afford the money not my life.
If you personally have your reasons for not wanting to pass on what you know, that's your prerogative.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LD, even if we accept your assertion that oliver2002 is entitled to an explanation, that doesn't mean any PPRuNer is obliged to provide it. The airline would be the place to go with demands; here the most a poster is entitled to is to hope that someone with knowledge finds the question sufficiently interesting to post a response.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FLCH and beanbag: to be fair, I Oliver2002 doesn't seem to have been asking for an "accounting" - he made a post about his experience and, when no-one showed any interest, he stopped posting, so what's the problem?
I confess, I do find the lack of interest, in itself, interesting. Is depressurization such a common occurrence that you regard it as just routine? Is it genuinely not a scary event for the crew?
I confess, I do find the lack of interest, in itself, interesting. Is depressurization such a common occurrence that you regard it as just routine? Is it genuinely not a scary event for the crew?
